Fast-RPL version 0.6

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Fri 25 Mar, 2005 12:43 am

Spengo wrote::O I can't find it

You meant this place right? http://paxl.org:2080/~tift/archives.php
Is there another place I can dl it from?

Try to learn french, it's harder than z80 assembly... ah here is the link;

http://paxl.org:2080/~tift/archives/Fas ... avpong.8xp

kuda · Post by **kuda** » Fri 25 Mar, 2005 7:29 am

More precisely :
http://paxl.org:2080/~tift/archives/Fast_RPL/

EDIT: Hum, didn't see your last messsage Kevin...
I think this is the most original of my RPLgames...

Me and McBeach are working on the next Version of FastRPL:
- Totally new editor as an apps
- Executor in the same apps to easy test it
- A debugger !!! ( with breakpoint, step by step execution where you can toogle between the code screen, the stack and variable screen, and the sreen of your game)
- Some new functionnality (maybe greyscale, or Link, but many other for sure)

And all of your ideas that we think we can implement of course !

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Fri 25 Mar, 2005 3:13 pm

Cool, so now that the editor/prgm executor is an app game can be a bit larger?

Question though: will it be possible to edit/protect programs?

kuda · Post by **kuda** » Fri 25 Mar, 2005 5:45 pm

Not really now... it might take one or two month i think...

About protecting programs, well I thought of that...
But I think that for the moment, there is not enough game in fastRPL (only mines and McBeach one's :p) so they might be usefull samples for new programmers in fastRPL...
In the next version, why not... But I prefer the idea of OpenSource

Kuda

Comikal · Post by **Comikal** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 12:34 am

Ideas for your next version:
I heard that you will make in more stable, thank you so much. I have already had 4 ram clears against my will, and now it is acting up again.

-List functions, maybe the same way as matrix
-Working lib->editor thing, unless im just rpl-illiterate
-Run indicator switch

If i think of any more, I'll post them. Also, thanks much kuda for bring this to us.

necro · Post by **necro** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 12:58 am

while this language sounds very neat...a basic user is not going to understand stacks and such...I tired and I can't (then again maybe I am just dumb

)it would be nice if their was a MUCH more simplified instruction set for it (it also would be neat if the editor displayed commands like basic does and then wrote them into the correct format)

DarkerLine · Post by **DarkerLine** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 1:44 am

necro wrote:while this language sounds very neat...a basic user is not going to understand stacks and such...I tired and I can't (then again maybe I am just dumb )it would be nice if their was a MUCH more simplified instruction set for it (it also would be neat if the editor displayed commands like basic does and then wrote them into the correct format)

they don't have to understand stacks, they just have to know that oyu have to write 2,2+ to add two and two...

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 1:46 am

necro wrote:while this language sounds very neat...a basic user is not going to understand stacks and such...I tired and I can't (then again maybe I am just dumb )it would be nice if their was a MUCH more simplified instruction set for it (it also would be neat if the editor displayed commands like basic does and then wrote them into the correct format)

What would be cool is a language that EXACLTY have the same command/syntax than TI-83+ BASIC, but with the few following features added:
-much more faster
-LCD shouldnt be updated everytime you disp^lay stuff
-Sprites
-allowing running archived sub routines

DarkerLine · Post by **DarkerLine** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 2:07 am

*cough* TI-89 Basic *cough*

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 2:12 am

DarkerLine wrote:*cough* TI-89 Basic *cough*

Hmm, might be an idea, altough it's still different from TI-83+ BASIC and I heard on a french forum that 68k basic was slower than TI-83+/86 basic, but having TI-89 BASIC like language on a 83+ (with a better interpreter would be cool too)

kuda · Post by **kuda** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 4:32 pm

How do you know libs are not working ???
It's true in fact, they might an uncompatibility with some apps,because the firsttime onmy calc it crash, but after it worked fine...

dysfunction · Post by **dysfunction** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 6:18 pm

68k BASIC is nearly an OOP- it has error-handling, local variables, and the ability to pass variables to subroutines. In fact, whereas there is simply prgmA on z80, on 68k there can be prgmA(2,1). Kinda reminds me of public A(int a, int b).

DJ_O · Post by **DJ_O** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 8:38 pm

dysfunction wrote:68k BASIC is nearly an OOP- it has error-handling, local variables, and the ability to pass variables to subroutines. In fact, whereas there is simply prgmA on z80, on 68k there can be prgmA(2,1). Kinda reminds me of public A(int a, int b).

much like functuions in Javascript, but easier maybe?

Comikal · Post by **Comikal** » Wed 30 Mar, 2005 9:03 pm

kuda wrote:How do you know libs are not working ???
It's true in fact, they might an uncompatibility with some apps,because the firsttime onmy calc it crash, but after it worked fine...

can you list which libs are compatible?

CoBB · Post by **CoBB** » Thu 31 Mar, 2005 5:27 am

It would be OO only if the subroutines had persistent local variables for each instance.